An FCC filing discovered on Saturday reveals in-depth details on Apple's first dedicated iBeacon-compatible beacon hardware, suggesting the company may soon introduce the micro-location technology to consumer spaces like so-called "smart homes."

Filed with the U.S. Federal Communications Commission's Office of Engineering and Technology (OET), the original equipment application is the first clear sign that Apple is testing an in-house hardware solution for its location-aware iBeacon technology. The document was spotted by Securifi and subsequently reported by TUAW.

According to the OET's paperwork, the device is labeled "Apple iBeacon" and carries the model number A1573. Hardware testing was performed at a facility owned by Chinese company Audix Technology, which ran assessments using a conducted shielding enclosure, a semi-anechoic chamber and other specialized equipment at the end of April through mid-May.

With an operating range between 2402MHz and 2480MHz, and peak working frequency of 2.4GHz, the device looks to be in line with Bluetooth protocol specifications. Testing passed in all areas, including three selected frequencies: 2402 MHz, 2440 MHz and 2480 MHz.

For example, visitors in an Apple Store can be notified of special deals and product information, or request help from a specific location when their iPhone discovers a placed iBeacon. Store owners can also use data sent by users' handsets to monitor any number of metrics, including customer traffic.

While Apple developed the technology behind iBeacon, companies rolling out services based on the platform use hardware made by third-party vendors. Even Apple itself uses Qualcomm Gimbal products in its brick-and-mortar stores.

If the device launches, it remains unclear whether Apple intends for the product to be marketed to consumers or businesses. While mere speculation, the small beacon device could work well with an upcoming iOS 8 feature called HomeKit. A framework for "smart home" hardware and software makers, HomeKit brings monitoring and control of connected devices like lights, A/V equipment and appliances together under the iOS umbrella.

It has been theorized that Apple could debut a new Apple TV model that acts as a hub for HomeKit-compatible products. Going even further, Apple's rumored "iWatch" is said to incorporate BLE, which suggests iBeacon support.

With iBeacons installed throughout a home sensing users' iPhones or iWatches (which would likely be worn 24 hours a day), and Apple TV handling connected device and appliance control, a HomeKit-iBeacon setup could be one of the most granular automated home ecosystems on the market.

Does anyone know if this means that there is/are tangible units currently in some form of production? Or, does this mean that, at least so far (as with Model # A1573), that only prototypes are in existence?

I understand why businesses, sports stadiums or museums use iBeacons to inform users of location based information, but how would one use iBeacons in their home? Wouldn't they need their own app? And why?

I understand why businesses, sports stadiums or museums use iBeacons to inform users of location based information, but how would one use iBeacons in their home? Wouldn't they need their own app? And why?

The Nest uses a proximity sensor to know when you're near it so it can automatically adjust its settings. Having iBeacons placed around the house goes one better since it would know where people are throughout a house and be able to handle lighting, environmental controls, as well as home security. This might be overkill but I could see it being used in this manner to control a wide variety of devices. The iBeacon works with an iPhone so everyone would have to carry there's to make it work. Doesn't everyone carry their phone with them constantly????

This is unrelated but it just hit me reading this article. So the samsung gear is quite expensive for a smart watch. One reason is you can take call and the radio chip to do that's costs(licensing more than hardware).

Well at WWDC apple introduced the tech where you can receive calls over wifi on your idevices via a tethered connection to your phone. No reason apple couldn't extend this to the iwatch.

The Nest uses a proximity sensor to know when you're near it so it can automatically adjust its settings. Having iBeacons placed around the house goes one better since it would know where people are throughout a house and be able to handle lighting, environmental controls, as well as home security. This might be overkill but I could see it being used in this manner to control a wide variety of devices. The iBeacon works with an iPhone so everyone would have to carry there's to make it work. Doesn't everyone carry their phone with them constantly????

My understanding of iBeacon is that the user needs a dedicated app that is programmed to respond to a certain identifier being broadcast by an iBeacon. The app along with location services can send a push notification to the users phone. This is a one way communication from the iBeacon to the phone. The iPhone does not send any communication back to the iBeacon and the iBeacon is not connected to the Internet or the private network.

Now that I think about it though, perhaps, if the app receiving a signal from the iBeacon is Apple's own HomeKit app and it was in communication with a home-based digital hub over WiFi, then it should be able to send commands to a device within the home. Depending on the action required, it does sound a bit convoluted though. If you just wanted the lights on you could just say "Hey Siri, turn on the lights." That way at least you are still in control in case you didn't want the lights to come on automatically.

I understand why businesses, sports stadiums or museums use iBeacons to inform users of location based information, but how would one use iBeacons in their home? Wouldn't they need their own app? And why?

The app is HomeKit.

Status monitoring: Some inexpensive iBeacons are quite intelligent. They can measure temperature, moisture, humidity, movement, etc -- and send that information to a central HomeKit Controller.

Micro-Location Personalization: With iBeacons spread around the house at known locations, your "you are here" sensor (iWearable, iWatch, iPhone, etc.) can determine where you are within a few feet by trilateration -- and send that information to a central HomeKit Controller.

It is dark outside and you or another family member needs to get something from the garage. The individual walks from the family room, to the hall, and opens the door to the garage. iBeacons and your "you are here" sensor provide this info to the HomeKit controller which turns on lights ahead of you (and later turns them off ) -- no fumbling for light switches in the dark.

Same scene, but an unidentified someone has opened the side door to the garage. iBeacons detect the activity and send the information to the HomeKit Controller. Based on time, schedule, who is at home -- the controller, turns on lights, security cams, locks doors, sends a message to you (iPhone, iWatch), calls 911 ....

"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -

So iBeacons can have WiFi and be connected to a network? I did not know that. Do you have any links to these intelegent iBeacons?

Sure. iBeacons can even be in anything.

So these would be some type of iBeacon other than what has been used by MLB and NFL, which are battery powered? If it is going to have WiFi or an operating system, embedded application, and send content other than the simple identifier, it would probably need to be AC powered. If the additional services are to provide sensors for temperature, humidity, etc., to me it seems that those would be the main features. The iBeacon aspect would be independent and unrelated to the environmental monitoring.

So these would be some type of iBeacon other than what has been used by MLB and NFL, which are battery powered?

For something persistent like a stadium I assume they would eventually run power, even for a simple iBeacon.

Quote:

If it is going to have WiFi or an operating system, embedded application, and send content other than the simple identifier, it would probably need to be AC powered. If the additional services are to provide sensors for temperature, humidity, etc., to me it seems that those would be the main features. The iBeacon aspect would be independent and unrelated to the environmental monitoring.

That's how it appears to me.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

My understanding of iBeacon is that the user needs a dedicated app that is programmed to respond to a certain identifier being broadcast by an iBeacon. The app along with location services can send a push notification to the users phone. This is a one way communication from the iBeacon to the phone. The iPhone does not send any communication back to the iBeacon and the iBeacon is not connected to the Internet or the private network.

Now that I think about it though, perhaps, if the app receiving a signal from the iBeacon is Apple's own HomeKit app and it was in communication with a home-based digital hub over WiFi, then it should be able to send commands to a device within the home. Depending on the action required, it does sound a bit convoluted though. If you just wanted the lights on you could just say "Hey Siri, turn on the lights." That way at least you are still in control in case you didn't want the lights to come on automatically.

if only apple employed people to write software for problems like these...

Sure but even so, the iPhone acting as an iBeacon is simply sending an identifier and is not expecting anything sent back to it from the receiving device. This is the common protocol used by iBeacons. All the computing work is being done on the receiving device. It is interesting to speculate on how extended feedback could be achieved but for now the only information I have been able to find is that iBeacon is broadcasting a simple identifier pair, no other content.

if only apple employed people to write software for problems like these...

It will be interesting to see how user friendly they can make it. Configuring a complex network of HomeKit devices, iBeacons, permissions, security access, etc., could be difficult for the technically challenged. A lot of average adults can't even get their mail or WiFi set up on their iPhone without the assistance of a more knowledgeable person.

The Nest uses a proximity sensor to know when you're near it so it can automatically adjust its settings. Having iBeacons placed around the house goes one better since it would know where people are throughout a house and be able to handle lighting, environmental controls, as well as home security. This might be overkill but I could see it being used in this manner to control a wide variety of devices. The iBeacon works with an iPhone so everyone would have to carry there's to make it work. Doesn't everyone carry their phone with them constantly????

My understanding of iBeacon is that the user needs a dedicated app that is programmed to respond to a certain identifier being broadcast by an iBeacon.

True, but there's more. The hardware in say, the iPhone, detects any iBeacon within range -- but ignores any identifiers that you aren't listening for. The addressing scheme provides for over 1 billion unique (addressable) devices sharing an identifier. Last I looked, you can listen for up to 20 identifiers -- or 20 billion unique iBeacons.

Quote:

The app along with location services can send a push notification to the users phone. This is a one way communication from the iBeacon to the phone. The iPhone does not send any communication back to the iBeacon and the iBeacon is not connected to the Internet or the private network.

Also true, but ... the App can be programmed to dialog with iBeacons ... low and slow. An inexpensive hub ($99 AppleTV) could dialog with the iBeacons, within range, and make that capability available to the Internet or the private network.

Quote:

Now that I think about it though, perhaps, if the app receiving a signal from the iBeacon is Apple's own HomeKit app and it was in communication with a home-based digital hub over WiFi, then it should be able to send commands to a device within the home.

Exactly!

Quote:

Depending on the action required, it does sound a bit convoluted though. If you just wanted the lights on you could just say "Hey Siri, turn on the lights." That way at least you are still in control in case you didn't want the lights to come on automatically.

Not every device supports Siri, or you may not wish to use a voice command -- wake the baby, alert an intruder ...

Currently, you can setup simulated HomeKit accessories using a tool provided in Xcode 6 running on a Mac -- this includes/requires BTLE on the Mac ... It's not too big a jump to assume that Apple will provide a Free HomeKit Tool when iOS 8 and Yosemite are available.

The HomeKit spec and the tool is flexible enough to handle current and any custom accessories and services that might come along.

The various manufacturers of HomeKit accessories must conform to some minimal requirements -- including providing a common, consistent way of setup and communication.

For example an unique HomeKit accessory must have the capability of receiving a request to identify itself and respond with something -- a flashing light/led, a sound/buzz , vibration ...

I have some $20 iBeacons that can do these things.

The benefit to all this is that we will have a lingua franca to easily communicate with HomeKit accessories and services.

"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -

The Nest uses a proximity sensor to know when you're near it so it can automatically adjust its settings. Having iBeacons placed around the house goes one better since it would know where people are throughout a house and be able to handle lighting, environmental controls, as well as home security. This might be overkill but I could see it being used in this manner to control a wide variety of devices. The iBeacon works with an iPhone so everyone would have to carry there's to make it work. Doesn't everyone carry their phone with them constantly????

That's why the article is extrapolating that this would work with an iWatch device that you wear constantly thereby not having to carry your phone everywhere. But you'd have to wear it all the time in the house.

Status monitoring: Some inexpensive iBeacons are quite intelligent. They can measure temperature, moisture, humidity, movement, etc -- and send that information to a central HomeKit Controller.

So iBeacons can have WiFi and be connected to a network? I did not know that. Do you have any links to these intelegent iBeacons?

I guess they could ... but that would be battery draining, expensive and overkill. Rather, the iBeacons could communicate, using BTLE, with a hub or controller. The hub or would be slightly more expensive (Hue Hub, $99 AppleTV) and provide the interface between many iBeacons and the internet and private network.

In an earlier response I mentioned the XCode HomeKit tool that Apple provides to setup and communicate with simulated accessories. When you setup a bridge like the Phillips Hue Hub, you first define the bridge, then individual lights (accessories). HomeKit gives you access through the bridge and to the individual lights.

Further, you have zones and groups of services -- an accessory can be a member of multiple zones and services ...

lights, upstairs lights, master bedroom

and

wake up, get ready for bed, [un]lock the doors ...

"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -

Not every device supports Siri, or you may not wish to use a voice command -- wake the baby, alert an intruder ...

Which is an excellent reason not to have iBeacons automatically operate HomeKit devices either.

Personally I would rather just turn on the light at the switch. I already know where all the light switches are in my house and any visitor will not be part of the permissions group so iBeacons aren't going to work for them anyway. In my opinion a lot of this home automation talk is just nonsense. Way more complicated than just manually doing things like we have always done. For the physically handicapped though, I think it could be a huge benefit. Personally I won't be installing many automatic convenience related HomeKit appliances. Perhaps some smarter light controllers for the outdoor lighting and replace the indoor timers we use when we are on vacation, but that is about it. Perhaps some video monitoring, but that is something that I can already add to my alarm system without HomeKit.

So these would be some type of iBeacon other than what has been used by MLB and NFL, which are battery powered?

For something persistent like a stadium I assume they would eventually run power, even for a simple iBeacon.

Quote:

If it is going to have WiFi or an operating system, embedded application, and send content other than the simple identifier, it would probably need to be AC powered. If the additional services are to provide sensors for temperature, humidity, etc., to me it seems that those would be the main features. The iBeacon aspect would be independent and unrelated to the environmental monitoring.

That's how it appears to me.

The device, you describe, with WiFi, an OS, AC Power ... could be an iBeacon in some environments like stadiums, airports, hospitals, etc.

For the home, that same device would, more likely, be a hub or controller for WiFi Accessories, BLE accessories and inexpensive battery-powered iBeacons. The hub/controller can take advantage of what iBeacons can do easily and inexpensively ... determine inside/outside temperature, detect motion in the baby's room ...

You get granular capability at an affordable cost.

The HomeKit spec provides information for an accessory that is offline or is out of range ... that sounds a lot like the iBeacon spec.

"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -

I love the diagram in the article. The type on the back of the device is specified to 3.35 pt. Myriad Thin. When I was studying typography, we were taught to never use type smaller than 5 pt. although I have had to use maybe 4.75 pt if the space is really constrained, but really? 3.35 pt.?

For the home, that same device would, more likely, be a hub or controller for WiFi Accessories, BLE accessories and inexpensive battery-powered iBeacons. The hub/controller can take advantage of what iBeacons can do easily and inexpensively ... determine inside/outside temperature, detect motion in the baby's room ...

This I still don't understand. How is the iBeacon detecting motion in the baby's room? The inexpensive iBeacon is dumb. It is only sending a BLE identifier. Not to be argumentative, but please link to such an iBeacon or explain how the iBeacon is detecting and communicating back to a central hub.

Sure but even so, the iPhone acting as an iBeacon is simply sending an identifier and is not expecting anything sent back to it from the receiving device. This is the common protocol used by iBeacons. All the computing work is being done on the receiving device. It is interesting to speculate on how extended feedback could be achieved but for now the only information I have been able to find is that iBeacon is broadcasting a simple identifier pair, no other content.

There are 2 levels of protocols:

The iBeacon protocol is as you describe

There is also a lower-level BTLE protocol which allows dialog between devices such as iBeacons and an iDevice.

iBeacon protocol is built using BTLE protocol but does not expose the dialog API.

An iDevice can concurrently run both protocols, and the interfaces are pushed down and aggregated at the OS radio level.

The low-level BTLE protocol is used to setup iBeacons -- set the identifiers, temperature, time ...

So, your iPhone can fart and chew gum at the same time -- it's magic

"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -

Which is an excellent reason not to have iBeacons automatically operate HomeKit devices either.

Personally I would rather just turn on the light at the switch. I already know where all the light switches are in my house and any visitor will not be part of the permissions group so iBeacons aren't going to work for them anyway. In my opinion a lot of this home automation talk is just nonsense. Way more complicated than just manually doing things like we have always done. For the physically handicapped though, I think it could be a huge benefit. Personally I won't be installing many automatic convenience related HomeKit appliances. Perhaps some smarter light controllers for the outdoor lighting and replace the indoor timers we use when we are on vacation, but that is about it. Perhaps some video monitoring, but that is something that I can already add to my alarm system without HomeKit.

Yes, I too find this uber geeky, and overly complex. Even the outdoor lights - wouldn't it be simpler to get a light activated switch and be done with?
The two features of home automation I really like is the ability to program lights for when I am away, or even to do so from abroad. The ability to lock and unlock the front door and activate and de-activate the alarm system could also useful, but even this is pushing it. I have never had major issues with this kind of thing in the past so it really is a solution to a problem that barely exists.

This is unrelated but it just hit me reading this article. So the samsung gear is quite expensive for a smart watch. One reason is you can take call and the radio chip to do that's costs(licensing more than hardware).

Well at WWDC apple introduced the tech where you can receive calls over wifi on your idevices via a tethered connection to your phone. No reason apple couldn't extend this to the iwatch.

Apple could always do this but it's not up to them, it's up to the carriers when it comes to calls over wifi.

This I still don't understand. How is the iBeacon detecting motion in the baby's room? The inexpensive iBeacon is dumb. It is only sending a BLE identifier. Not to be argumentative, but please link to such an iBeacon or explain how the iBeacon is communicating back to a central hub.

If it's a dumb device it wouldn't, but a dumb device could still work in a smart home.

For example, you walk into a room and your iPhone detects you're within a specific proximity to an iBeacon that you set up in that room. You get no notification on your iPhone/iWatch, it just registers the iBeacon ID which it then forwards to your Home Hub. This could be for adjusting lights, just keeping a database of movement patterns for some complex algorithm for temperature control, or whatever else you can think of, but the iBeacon itself would still be a dumb device.

I've actually wanted this with Nest since it was introduced. Not everyone has dual HVAC units in a home (common areas v. bedrooms) and even if you do you having the thermostat in the master bedroom will not help the people in the other bedrooms if there is no one in the master bedroom on a given night. Nest has a motion sensor, which is fine, but an iBeacon offers an additional option for sensing movement in a home since most of us do carry our phones on our person. I had wished Nest had inexpensive devices that could be placed in pretty much all rooms that could measure various things to give a more well rounded view of the home for even better power savings and comfort levels.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Yes, I too find this uber geeky, and overly complex. Even the outdoor lights - wouldn't it be simpler to get a light activated switch and be done with?
The two features of home automation I really like is the ability to program lights for when I am away, or even to do so from abroad. The ability to lock and unlock the front door and activate and de-activate the alarm system could also useful, but even this is pushing it. I have never had major issues with this kind of thing in the past so it really is a solution to a problem that barely exists.

This is not an either or situation. There will always be physical switches that override any home automation. But if manufacturers are building in ibeacons to their switches and you want to add a hub and turn on smartphone functionality in your iphone, you can have it very cheaply.